The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
if you delete CB1 only off of excitatory neurons you lose the anti-anxiety angiolytic effects of THC but you still have the you know panicky angiogenic effects of hos if you delete CB1 off of only the inhibit at gaban neurons you still have the lowd do anti-anxiety effect but now you don't have the high do angiogenic panicky effect
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
for reasons that we don't totally understand there's like way more cannaboid receptors on inhibitory neurons than there is on excitatory neurons but in the early days of creating the genetic lines um gavan Marano and beat Luts over in Europe created um like deletion of CB1 only from excitatory neurons or only from inhibitory neurons okay ... but it's the CB1 on the glutamatergic exy neurons that mediate most of the classic signs of what we would consider intoxication from THC or cannabis